MicrowaveEngineering I (passive RF circuits), Microwave Engineering II (active circuits), Antennas,Advanced EM Theory, and Electrical Packaging Principles. There are several degree options,BSEE, an accelerated MSEE (BS +1 year), on campus MSEE, on-line MSEE, and the Ph.D.The University of Arizona (UA) is consistently rated high in the area of student engagement. TheUA’s mission is to have 100% student engagement, which involves experiences beyond regularclassroom instruction to help prepare students for industry. The Keysight Industry-ReadyProgram is one such activity the RF engineering program uses to foster student engagement. Webelieve that exposing students to typical EDA tools used in industry to enhance the in-classactivities is an important part to
usually framed as a problem ofrepresentation with solutions and interventions aimed at increasing the numbers ofunderrepresented groups. Historically, and in the present moment, the field of engineering hasnot been the most diverse in terms of race and gender. As of 2014, only 19.8% of all engineeringundergraduate students in the United States identified as female, down 0.7% from 2004 [1].Compared to this percentage, the University of Virginia’s engineering school had a 31% femaleundergraduate enrollment in 2017 [2]. Yet, nationally females represent greater than 50% of allcollege students. Recent efforts have initiated means to strengthen an atmosphere of inclusion,but there is more work to be done to bridge the identified gaps.Reasons for the
in the S/W V&Vtopics being covered in the class. The student outcomes assessment data and pedagogicalassessment data are presented and discussed in this paper. The class management strategies fordelivering ALTs are presented in a separate accompanying paper in this conference.1. Introduction and RationaleTraditionally in engineering education, student-centered lectures have been the predominantmodel of teaching. However, it has been suggested [1] that this may not be the most effectivemethod for imparting knowledge in all disciplines, as students may not be able to retain andapply knowledge they have gained to the extent that is required in their professional careers.Therefore the current push is towards flipped class rooms [2] and
diverse teams lead to better conclusions for complex problems. Therehave been numerous studies, from a variety of contexts, which have studied this premise.Recently, an article described using a linearized maximally diverse grouping problemformulation to create diverse teams within University of Michigan’s Engineering GlobalLeadership Honors Program. Their results were implemented with minimal changes [1].Work in homogeneous teams (“Group of Same”) versus heterogeneous teams (“Group ofDifferent”) has shown that heterogeneous teams encounter more challenges as the diverseteammates learn how to work together; however, they often overcome their homogeneous teamcounterparts with better results [2, 3]. Extensive research by Ned Herrmann has evaluated
students understand diversity and inclusion within theirengineering programs, and how these understandings are shaped by aspects of the environmentin which they are situated.Our study is a component of a broader research project that is examining the seeminglyintractable problems of diversity and inclusion that emerge through the converging threads offormation of professional identity and culture of engineering disciplines. In this study we utilizeda qualitative analysis of interview data to explore the undergraduate students’ perceptions ofdiversity and inclusion within the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) atPurdue University [1]. Our interview draws upon cultural dimensions of engineering disciplinesthat encourage student to
, educators and policy makers have expressed growing concerns over thelevels of math and science achievement among American students and the gradual decline in thenumbers of young people moving into science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM)careers [1], [2], [3]. These concerns have led to the development of new standards for scienceand technology education [4], [5], [6], policy initiatives aimed at promoting science andtechnology education [7], [8],[9], and to a growing body of research on math and sciencelearning and the pathways leading to STEM-related careers [10], [11]. While the picture oflooming shortages of scientists and engineers has been challenged and recent studies haveindicated that American students are taking more science and
race or gender, into account. Taken together, these documents constructthe department’s image of an ‘ideal engineer.’ Undergraduate students’ engineering identities have emerged as a prominent researchtopic among engineering educators. Identity—both in terms of social identities (i.e.,race/ethnicity, gender, etc.) and as engineers (i.e., viewing oneself as an engineering person)—has been found to play a role in undergraduate persistence [1], [2], retention [3], [4], [5], andeven teamwork [6], [7]. Recent research extends beyond assessing impact to understanding theconcept itself—for example, recent work has identified recognition and interest as key players inwhether or not a student will develop an engineering identity [8], [9], [10
) into theircurriculum. Although Wing describes CT as a problem-solving approach that utilizesfundamental computing concepts, which is applicable not only for scientists but everyone, mostof the computational thinking instructional approaches are related to computer programming.Unfortunately, it is also unclear whether people use CT when solving non-programmingproblems. This study aims to answer two research questions: (1) In what ways do students usecomputational thinking skills when solving non-programming problems if any?; and (2) Ifstudents use CT when solving non-programming problems, in what ways do their approachesdiffer from computer science students? We conducted a qualitative multiple within-site casestudy research with three units of
wildlife. In some projects, we assume that the wildlife is somehow taggedor collared while in other projects, we create the animal collar. These projects create aneed to develop environmentally rugged yet technologically flexible communicationlinks. For example, in one project, the animals (the American marten, see Figure 1) wearsmall collars with an RF transmitter that serves as a locating signal. Traditionally, smallaircraft with antennas mounted on the plane (or hand held) fly low in tight routes,scanning the ground. Instead, our students developed an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV) drone that flies above the tree line and scans the surrounding area for a signal.This UAV employs a Software Defined Radio (SDR) system to directionally locate
for- profit or nonprofit institution.Higher Education Tuition-Based On-Campus Enrollments are DownIn the Distance Education Learning Report, Allen and Seaman [1] report higher educationenrollments, overall, for academic years spanning 2012-2015, are down across public and privatefor-profit institutions, while enrollments are slightly higher in private non-profit institutions.Figure 1 below depicts this relationship. Figure 1 – Enrollments by Type of Institution [1]The Allen and Seaman data reflects nearly a one million student decrease of -931,317 in studentsstudying on campus. Figure 2 below depicts both the percent change from 2012 – 2015 as wellas the equivalent student population. Worth noting is that public
work and engineering work moregenerally compare?Based on qualitative in-depth semi-structured interviews, this paper analyzes the workexperiences of 13 young engineers in their first years of work after graduating fromuniversities in the United States. Interviewee-reported critical incidents of top and bottommoments, as well as experiences in creating, advancing and implementing new ideas in work,were coded into different dimensions of learning experiences according to Mezirow’s [1]transformative learning theory in order to understand better what these experiences comprise.Many positively experienced innovation efforts were related to implementing new features orcomponents to products or process improvements, and collaboration and feedback
Education, 2018 Early Career Plans in Engineering: Insights from the Theory of Planned BehaviorIntroductionCalls to address labor market demands in engineering industry often cite the need to increaseengineering degree attainment at postsecondary institutions. However, prior research onengineering students’ career decision making indicates that degree attainment in engineeringdoes not guarantee students’ plans to pursue engineering careers after graduation [1]. While thereare numerous studies of engineering career decision making processes, most researchers studycareer decisions as students exit college or enter the workforce. In this paper, we suggestengineering students’ career plans are a set of evolving
education and the rising costs of college. The model was based upon alternativestructures of credentialing and financing as a response to these potential pressures. Thecurricular model proposes restructuring engineering degree program towards: 1) shorterundergraduate programs that focus on developing horizontal transfer of knowledge ratherthan in-depth disciplinary knowledge and 2) periodic in-depth “educational renewal”throughout an individual’s career. This structure is grounded by, and emerges from,established models of liberal arts degree programs and is supported by decades of evidenceon the aspects of college which most impact long-term student development. From a policyperspective in order for such a disruptive model to have a chance of
Advantagesexperimentation due to the continued integration of technology.The objective is to design an experiment to be used in laboratory Fan Input Velocity 1. Practical, hands on approachthat enhances the student understanding of convection process 2. Allows for design, build, and test opportunities for studentsand principles. A cost-effective design is generated with three coreprinciples: 1) Low Cost, 2) Low Maintenance, and 3) Concept 3. Can be incorporated into multiple laboratory
often below theirexpectations.For many students, instead of using effective study strategies to fully understand key concepts andto master problem solving techniques, the goal of their current study and test taking strategy is to“maximize partial credit.” The most common version of this strategy looks essentially like this. 1. Memorize problems from the homework, in-class examples, or previous exams. 2. Match each problem on the exam to one of the memorized problems that most closely resembles it. 3. Write down the memorized solution, making adjustments along the way so that the solution looks more relevant to the exam problem.This strategy is often very effective at getting a passing grade or better, in large part because
mismatch of talentavailability in STEM fields 1. Innovation capacity is a national concern for U.S.competitiveness2. Innovative thinking should be an expectation of the university community andall students should be exposed to it early in their university experience, through a variety ofeducational formats and delivery methods 3. Previous investments in STEM education have notresulted in desired level of innovativeness 4. Prompted by such concerns, the American Societyfor Engineering Education (ASEE) partnered with the federally funded National ScienceFoundation (NSF) to evaluate the effectiveness of lean startup approach in enacting educationaltransformation. With a goal to improve innovativeness in STEM education, ASEE launchedInnovation Corps
) present a true integration of science, engineering and technology [1]. This is anew approach to teaching science that will require new curriculum materials, professionaldevelopment and other supports for teachers, and new assessments [2]. Assessments aligned tothe NGSS are expected to require students to draw upon an understanding of core ideas inscience and cross-cutting concepts while engaging in engineering and science practices. Currentassessments were not designed to accomplish these goals and cannot easily be modified to meetthis expectation [3]. These new assessment requirements present challenges on many levelsincluding the development of complex tasks that integrate the three dimensions and that are bothequitable for a wide range of
interventionsin authentic settings [1-3]. The four key principles of DBIR are that: 1. The focus of the work is on persistent problems of practice from multiple stake-holders’ perspectives; 2. There is a commitment to iterative, collaborative design that is informed by implementation evidence; 3. There is a focus on developing theory and knowledge related to both classroom learning and implementation through systematic inquiry; and 4. There is a concern with developing capacity for sustaining change in systems.Overall, DBIR projects seek to advance and refine educational theories and toexplore the contextual constraints, moderating factors, and mediating variables thatconstrain or shape how the intervention is implemented
synthesize all the high-qualityresearch evidence in order to answer a specific research question [1].” They differ fromtraditional reviews, where authors aim to summarize the literature of a particular topic withoutnecessarily sharing the details of their processes or assessing the quality of the studies, in thatthey are a research method in themselves, designed to test hypotheses and answer researchquestions [2].Librarians regularly participate in SLRs, whether as consultants, searchers, or co-authors [3], [4].A recent emphasis on SLRs in engineering education led to the ASEE Engineering LibrariesDivision (ELD) co-sponsorship of a workshop on the topic at the 2017 ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition in Columbus, OH [5].The authors, four STEM
addedinteractive features for class in spring 2018. In this paper, we will present our material designrationale and the results from the spring 2018 class. A list of must-have features for reviewvideos and instructor reflection on course and video production will also be shared.II. Course Set-Up and Course Material DesignA. Course set-upLike other engineering courses in the curriculum, student academic performance in ME 491 isassessed through a variety of assignments. The weight of each category of assignments are listedin Table 1. Five assignments were designed to help students review prerequisite knowledge andskills. They are distributed across different learning units with a total weight of 7% of the coursegrade. Each review assignment includes a video
American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Effective Teamwork Dynamics in a Unit Operations Laboratory Course1. IntroductionThe Chemical Engineering Unit Operations Laboratory is a unique course that relies heavily on acooperative team effort for successful learning that leads to a compelling laboratoryexperience[1-3]. In this course, team assignments play a critical role in the performance of agroup because every laboratory session involves peer interactions, hands-on experimentationfrom start to finish, data analysis and discussion, and a significant amount of writing time, i.e., aworkload that is intentionally more than one individual is expected to manage. The dauntingworkload for this course should
lackingexperimental capacity as well as for many students with physical disabilities. Students areincreasingly required to use computer-based systems, such as Blackboard, Canvas and otherlearning management software (LMS) to complete course requirements and have demonstratedproficiency with computer-based homework and assignments [1]. However, utilizing VRexperiments for traditional lab requirements with current generation VR hardware is relativelynovel to both the faculty and the students. This study evaluates the participant’s (the students)perceived effectiveness of performing VR labs using the HTC Vive VR hardware system. Current generation VR hardware provide such a remarkable level of immersion andfeeling of actual presence in the VR
graduate compared to other majors. The student retention ratedepends on several factors including institution selectivity, race, ethnicity, and gender of student,all of which are tied to the student preparedness for undergraduate engineering education [1].Some US institutions admit students as undeclared majors. These students declare their majoreither in the sophomore or in junior year. However, at other institutions, majority of the studentsdeclare their majors during their admission in the freshman year. Until the new “undeclaredengineering” major was introduced in 2011, engineering and computer science students at CSUFwere, generally, admitted with a declared engineering major. Those who were not certain abouttheir majors were admitted as
the project-based learningenvironment at Iron Range Engineering, bringing value to the overall learning process and willcontinue to be used to improve our teaching and student learning.IntroductionTraditional teaching methods are often unengaging for certain types of students. In recent years,the use of active learning strategies has been on the rise. Current research suggests that thesestrategies can lead to improvements in learner engagement, problem-solving skills, and long-termretention of knowledge. One technique of active learning is gamification, which is a challengeactivity defined by rules, where players interact with each other or the gaming platform, toprovoke an emotional reaction and finally, result in a quantifiable outcome [1
feedback from responses from the first workshop. This paperexamines the results of the two GRE workshops, and describes (1) the two workshops, (2) thesurvey used to evaluate the workshops, and (3) the results from the pre and post survey. Theresults indicated that 89% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were more preparedto take the GRE after attending the first workshop with an 11% increase in the level of awarenessabout the GRE from the pre and post survey. There were two major changes between the twoworkshops: (1) an increase in the advertisement to the students and (2) the Dean of GraduateSchool presented the opening information. The results from the second workshop indicated a22% increase in the level of awareness about the
particularintersections of identities. This study focuses on intersections of gender and URM status forengineering students, the analysis of which has historically been limited due to small samplesizes. The EMS is part of a multi-year National Science Foundation (NSF) funded researchinitiative (Epicenter1) with a goal to identify experiences and environments that encourageinnovation and entrepreneurship amongst engineering students over time. EMS is a longitudinaldataset of nationally representative engineering students2 who are surveyed at three time points:(1) as undergraduate students, (2) upon graduation, and (3) early years in the workforce. Thisanalysis is based on the first time point; juniors, seniors, and 5th year undergraduate engineeringstudents. The
students to assesstheir interests, motivations, and engagement in their capstone projects. By comparing studentresponses and evaluating the level of service that each project embodies, we can assess whetherstudents in differing projects show different motivations. Our results provide insights intomethods for maintaining student success in capstone projects and for selecting future projects.1. IntroductionCapstone design courses are a culminating experience for engineering students involving one ortwo semesters with a design and build sequence focusing on “real-world” applications. Theseexperiences prepare engineering students for future professional life and are critical junctures intheir engineering education. Recently, some capstone projects
after you’ve established “ABCD”. The second pedagogical method developed andimplemented was a game based off of “Paper Telephone” which is used during review days. Thegame emphasizes the connection between the free body diagram and the equations ofequilibrium and reinforces the idea that the “ABCD” components drive “E” or rather the FBDdrives the equations of equilibrium. The combination of these two devices helps show theimportance of the FBD in solving engineering problems.Method 1 “ABCs of FBDs”Statics text books are generally consistent in their descriptions of what should be included in freebody diagrams. (Excerpts included in the Appendix.) They routinely describe what should andshould not be included but do not do a satisfactory job of
Fair and effective assessment of engineering knowledge and skills in a way that can beinstructionally useful is a formidable challenge. With calls for learning of deeper levelengineering skills [1], [2], the use of open-ended problems for assessment has become of greaterimportance. While multiple-choice or fill-in-the blank type assessments allow for fast, reliablegrading, both options severely limit the range of skills that can be authentically and accuratelyevaluated. Alternatively, open-ended problems enable students to demonstrate a wider range ofskills but require significant time to grade. Hence, large scale courses that hope to assess a widerange of skills authentically rely on graders to help manage the heavy workload. Open
years of the program with implicationsfor education leaders, researchers, and policy makers.Literature reviewA recent report published by the U.S. Department of Education [1] emphasizes the constantgrowing need for STEM skilled employees in the US and the fact that the economy at large, andnot just the traditional STEM occupations, will benefit from a STEM-literate workforce. Thereport builds on multiple national publications from the past decades [2-5], which identifiedSTEM knowledge and skills as highly desired by employers yet pointed at gaps in access andachievement among US communities and students. The 2016 report illustrates a vision forclosing these gaps by establishing six components of high quality STEM education: communitiesof